The work internationally and i am delighted to be here to introduce to you, as in thomas, a longtime friend of the book festival this is the fifth or sixth time with us. A prolific author of fascinating stories. Many bestselling. He is a writer and editor for newsweek for many years, editor for ten years. And has taught writing and journalism at harvard and princeton in our purposes today he has written a fantastic book, lively, sad, funny in places. And thank you for joining us. [applause] you have written ten books but just to rattle off a couple of the titles, the wise man, the man to see, being nixon, the very best man. Let me start with the most obvious question, why the subject this time questionin . Its exciting to write about men for all these years its fascinating to read about a woman. In this particular book i have a ton of help from my wife who is sitting over here in lots of ways shes always been involved in my books. She is actually a lawyer and we met at law school. She
Will amend after what occurred. 2027488001 for republicans. 2027488000 for democrats. Ndependents, 2027488002 if you want to post on our twitter feed, you can do so cspanwj and then you can post on our facebook page, facebook. Com cspan. David brooks, the columnist had a piece on saturday taking place after the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh taking a look at the politics, particularly the state of u. S. Politics as it played out over the process and he has this thoughts saying what we saw in the hearings was the unvarnished tribal is asian of national life. Ofthe heart tribalization national life. These narratives were about what or what did not happen at a party 36 years ago. There was nothing particularly ideological. Nothing that touched on any of the Great National disputes. It reactions to the narrative have been determined almost entirely by party affiliation. Those who support democrats aseysing bl narratives. I can think of few exceptions. These hearings were a devastating blo
The nominee is or the nominating president is. But it is frustrating, because the nominees do not answer a lot of the questions we would like them to answer. They do not tell us things people want to know. Host has that been a constant theme of those appearing before the senate to get confirmed . Or is that a more recent thing . Guest tomorrow to some extent, it is a more recent thing. And to some extent, there is a historical pattern at play. Historically, nominees have resisted talking about how they would vote in a specific matter. But they talk about more wellestablished precedents, talk more openly about things i have previously written about, and speak more openly about traditional theory. Host professor elena kagan wrote a view of a book taking a look at the confirmation process. Specifically highlighting the board hearings presenting to the lic the meaning of the repetition of platitudes displays discussion of viewpoints and anecdotes have replaced legal analysis. Is that somet
Campaign 2018. And liz mayer tries to talk about the republican partiess ef partys effort to attract female voters. Join the discussion on tuesday morning. Caroline shapiro is the codirector on the Supreme Court of college law and joining us on a Historical Perspective on Supreme Court nominations. You wrote about the hearing process, but if you applied it to the confirmation process overall, you said it is it is exciting and part disappointment. What did you mean by that . In part it is aspect cal. It is exciting to hear this person who may become a Supreme Court, get a sense of who they are in terms of their public personality and intelligence. I think that is regardless of who the nominating president is. It is frustrating because the nominees dont tell us things that people really want to know. Has that been a constant theme of those appearing for ap peering before the appearing before the senate or is that a more recent thing . To some extent the more recent thing and to some exte
garland. controlled by the democratic party in a radical left. as somebody who served there for many years, first it is associate deputy attorney general and then it is special assistant to the attorney general and then finally chief of staff to the attorney general and in my view the greatest attorney general ever. this department, this department is destroying america. it is destroying the 2024 election. it is violating every norm, every tradition, everything it inherited to ensure that that department would be trustworthy and could be reliable. it has criminalized politics and i want to say this, if we do not break the back of the department of justice, and i will explain what i mean in a moment, it will destroy this country and we will not be able to claw our way back. this is not hyperbole. i don t need to be. let s start. cnn. exclusive special counsel prosecutors question witnesses about chaotic oval office meeting after trump lost the 2020 election. multiple sources t